Do Screen Casting Activities Require Logging? How AINOPOL Screen Casting Reflector Meets the 6-Month Audit Retention Requirement under Order 176

“The screen casting function works perfectly, why do public security inspectors ask for screen casting logs?”

This is a real scenario encountered by many hotel and campus IT managers in 2026. Guests scan codes to cast videos for entertainment, which seems merely a guest-room service feature. However, connection records and operation logs generated by screen casting activities can no longer be treated as trivial auxiliary data under the inspection framework of Ministerial Order No.176.

Effective October 1, 2026, Ministerial Order No.176 of the Ministry of Public Security, Measures for the Supervision and Inspection of Cyberspace Security by Public Security Organs, clearly states that inspectors will focus on verifying whether user registration information and internet access logs are recorded and retained in accordance with law. Meanwhile, the Cybersecurity Law of the People’s Republic of China mandates network operators to retain relevant network logs for no less than six months.

Screen casting session logs fall into the category of cybersecurity operation logs and shall be retained uniformly as required by Order 176. This means screen casting must not only be functional, but also auditable. Screen casting activity logs must be fully retained for 180 days and associable with user identities.

I. Why Screen Casting Activities Require Logging

1. Screen casting is not confined to “the same guest room”

On traditional hotel networks, if guest Wi-Fi and TVs reside within the same broadcast domain, mobile phones searching for available TVs may discover devices from other rooms, bringing risks of accidental cross-room casting. Once cross-room casting incidents occur, guests may post photos on social media or file complaints via OTA platforms. Hotels often cannot answer key questions: who initiated the casting, how many rooms were affected, and how long the session lasted.

Without screen casting logs, hotels are put in a passive position during public opinion handling. The problem lies not in poor service attitude, but in lack of retrievable records.

2. Order 176 adopts a broader definition of “cyberspace security”

Order 176 expands regulatory coverage from “internet security” to “cyberspace security”, including cybersecurity, data security and information security. Audio & video transmission, device connection relationships and user identity information involved in screen casting are all data flow scenarios subject to this regulatory framework.

During official inspections, screen casting logs, just like regular internet access logs, must form a complete traceability chain answering: who, at what time, using which device, performed what action.

3. Screen casting logs demand more complex fields than ordinary internet logs

Core fields for standard internet logs include source IP, account, timestamp and domain name. Beyond these basic fields, screen casting logs need to record screen casting device information (sender and display endpoints), casting protocol type, session start & end time, data volume and other dimensions.

Practical compliance requirements specify logs must cover real-name information, online/offline timestamps, IP addresses, MAC addresses and access URLs. Screen casting logs additionally require session start/end time and data volume of each casting session.

II. Three Common Bottlenecks in Screen Casting Log Compliance

1. Disconnected authentication and logging systems

To cut costs, many hotels purchase authentication routers and log servers separately. The authentication system records when a mobile number such as 138xxxx went online, while the log server logs which addresses IP 10.0.0.5 accessed. The two datasets operate independently with no underlying correlation mechanism.

When inspectors request the complete screen casting records of a specific guest, administrators have to manually compare timestamps, which is inefficient and error-prone. Order 176 explicitly examines log collection and retention capabilities. Logs assembled from multiple separate devices often fail remote compliance verification.

2. Insufficient log retention period or incomplete fields

Default storage cycles of common routers are usually only 30 days, far below the statutory 6-month requirement. More critically, incomplete fields prevail. Many devices only log IP addresses and access time, lacking core data such as screen casting device identifiers, casting protocols and session duration.

During remote public security inspections, the authentication page may appear operational, yet authorities cannot verify whether screen casting activity logs are complete and traceable.

3. No binding between screen casting activities and real-name identities

A screen casting log merely recording “a mobile phone initiated casting” without linking to a specific authenticated user is essentially an incomplete record for compliance purposes. Authorities require a full closed loop: user real-name authentication → network access authorization → log generation → centralized log storage for inquiry and traceability.

III. How AINOPOL Screen Casting Reflector Enables “Reliable Casting & Auditable Records”

1. Cross-VLAN casting: no network segment interconnection, no multicast forwarding

In traditional deployments, guest Wi-Fi and TV networks are strictly isolated via VLANs. AirPlay, DLNA and other casting protocols rely on mDNS and SSDP multicast discovery, which only works within the same broadcast domain. Casting fails once network segmentation is enforced.

The core design of the AINOPOL Screen Casting Reflector is to avoid opening network segments or permitting cross-VLAN multicast. It implements application-layer proxy inside the gateway. When TVs send multicast announcements within the TV network, the reflector captures and registers them in real time. When a mobile phone in the guest network sends a casting query, the reflector matches devices based on room binding relationships and responds via unicast, rewriting the real IP and port to gateway proxy addresses. Media streams are forwarded bidirectionally in the path: mobile phone → gateway → TV. Multicast will never broadcast across VLANs, and Layer 3 routing remains unopened.

2. Native association between real-name authentication and screen casting behavior

Leveraging underlying session binding technology, AINOPOL Dream Series Secure Optical Gateways natively link authenticated accounts with screen casting activities. Guests must complete Portal real-name authentication by connecting to guest room Wi-Fi before using screen casting. The authenticated user ID runs through binding records, screen casting sessions and audit logs.

Screen casting logs do not simply record “a mobile phone cast content”. Instead, they capture: which authenticated user, at what time, from which room, using which device, cast for how long.

This correlation is established the moment logs are generated, with no post-hoc data matching required. During official inspections, administrators filter records by room number, mobile number or time window and export unified reports in one click. Each entry carries complete authentication information.

3. 180-day full log local storage with complete fields

The Dream Gateway ZH-M1 equipped with hard disks automatically performs rolling storage of complete logs for 180 days. Log fields cover MAC address, IP address, authenticated account (mobile number / ID number), online/offline time, access URL, plus screen casting session details including sender endpoint, display endpoint, protocol type, session start time, end time and data volume.

Logs are stored encrypted and cannot be directly modified after being written to local hard disks. The system comes with pre-built standard compliance report templates meeting regulatory requirements, supporting one-click export and real-time reporting to network supervision platforms.

4. Audit logs supporting type filtering and paginated query

Audit logs capture all operations including screen casting start/end, binding success and unbinding. Fields include timestamp, event type, room, authenticated username, mobile IP, TV IP, protocol, duration and traffic volume, with support for type filtering and paginated query.

Administrators can view active screen casting sessions in real time via the gateway web management console: session ID, room number, authenticated username, mobile IP, TV IP, protocol, start time, elapsed duration and traffic statistics. Force termination of sessions is available in one click.

Drawing on integrated authentication and logging capabilities of AINOPOL Dream Series Secure Optical Gateways, the native integrated “Communication & Security” solution takes full-optical network as the foundation, audio & video as the engine, and security as the protective shield. The Dream Gateway integrates firewall, IPS intrusion prevention, WAF application protection and an AV antivirus engine with cloud-updatable virus signature database.

Security policies are centrally managed on the EAAS cloud management platform, where screen casting log auditing is configured and monitored on the same interface. Hotels do not need to purchase extra security hardware or deploy separate log servers for screen casting compliance. Security capabilities and log auditing are built into the optical gateway.

FAQ

Q: How long shall screen casting logs be retained under Order 176?
A: No less than six months (180 days). In accordance with Article 21 of the Cybersecurity Law and Ministerial Order No.176, network operators shall retain relevant network logs for a minimum of six months. Screen casting session logs are classified as cybersecurity operation logs and shall be retained as required by Order 176.

Q: What fields must be included in screen casting logs?
A: Core fields include: screen casting sender endpoint information, display endpoint information, casting protocol type, session start time, end time, data volume, corresponding room number, authenticated username, mobile IP, TV IP, session duration and traffic volume. Logs must be associable with real-name authenticated users to form a complete “person – identity credential – network access” evidence chain.

Q: Will the screen casting reflector introduce extra casting latency?
A: Media streams are bidirectionally proxied via the path “mobile phone → gateway → TV”. Image quality and latency are nearly identical to casting within a native network segment. Operating at the application layer, the reflector does not add extra network hops, so guests perceive no obvious difference.